Sven Pran

I have no problem with the fact that exposing cards from a quitted trick is an infraction of the laws. My point is that if a defender (suddenly) suspects a revoke by either (a:) himself or (b:) his partner then as I understand the laws it is perfectly legal for him to: a: Inspect his own last played card and ask a question to the effect: "Was [named suit] led to the last trick?" b: Ask his partner a question to the effect: "Did you revoke in the last trick?" Sven

I have a very strong feeling that if East-West have correct information from the beginning then South will indeed complete the transfer and bid 2♠, so 3♠X in South is IMHO never a contract to be considered. Now I don't immediately see how 3♠X can go five down. However, assuming that this is verified I would adjust to 800 E-W for 2♠X -4. regards Sven

Director's error (Law 82C) kicks in whenever the Director has failed to inform a player of all available options. Whether the player would have selected an option different from what (s)he did does not matter in this respect, but it matters for the possible subsequent adjustments selected by the Director. regards Sven

I agree on that, but do we also agree that if the player had specifically asked about revoke rather than asking to have the quitted trick inspected, then it would have been OK? Law 61B sets no time limit on such questions. regards Sven